Kyrie Irving is now a...

[Shaqdaddy11]

Most of the people on this board told me the cavs had no chance against any of the teams in the west...

That was a prediction, not a fact. The majority of the people on these boards didn't think the cavs would win it either 7 months in advance.

You've just publicly stated Curry isn't in the top 3 PGs in the league while Irving is the best - sad proof that you know nothing about basketball.

 

[flyerhawk]

Win share on a bad team vs good team makes a difference...I also said i prefer PER and other stats, but no one stat can be used, you have to look at everything

If you prefer PER why are you trying to argue that some rate stat proves anything?

You are remarkably good, and disingenuous, when it comes to cherry picking stats and context.

 

[flyerhawk]

My top 3

1) Kyrie Irving
2) Chris Paul
3) Russell westbrook

OK. So you're a complete idiot.

 

[WiggyRuss]

So your argument is based on the fact that Kyrie is more naturally talented than Curry right? Kyrie was a phenom recruited to the biggest basketball program in nation. Curry went to some low level D1 school and happened to take that bunch of nobodies to the Elite 8. A guy that was never supposed to even play college ball because NO ONE recruited him.

If you look at things in the grand scheme, Curry shouldn't even be in the NBA. Yet here is an NBA champion and 2 time MVP, because he's worked to get there. That's 1,000x more impressive than someone expected to be there.

So keep comparing the age ranges. That's all well and good. But if you want to keep harping on the age range, keep in mind that Curry wasn't even supposed to be in the NBA.

I think Kyrie might be a phenom but its not because he is a freak like a Rose or Wall or RW. He is a phenom because of how unbelievably skilled he is- much like Curry.

Shouldnt be in the NBA? Athletically do you think their is a HUGE difference between Kyrie and Curry? Id say Kyrie is the slightly better athlete- but in no way shape or form is Kyrie a high flyer- he might be a little quicker and a little slicker under the hoop- but not by a lot.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

If you prefer PER why are you trying to argue that some rate stat proves anything?

You are remarkably good, and disingenuous, when it comes to cherry picking stats and context.

That's what trolls are best at! Bullshit.

 

[Bulletz]

OK. So you're a complete idiot.

Or a comedian.

 

[CitySushi]

I think Kyrie might be a phenom but its not because he is a freak like a Rose or Wall or RW. He is a phenom because of how unbelievably skilled he is- much like Curry.

Shouldnt be in the NBA? Athletically do you think their is a HUGE difference between Kyrie and Curry? Id say Kyrie is the slightly better athlete- but in no way shape or form is Kyrie a high flyer- he might be a little quicker and a little slicker under the hoop- but not by a lot.

I think there is a definitely reason that Kyrie was a highly touted recruit and Curry was not. Kyrie is an explosive athlete, just not when you compare him to prime Rose, Westbrook or Wall. Those guys are almost non-human. But Kyrie going to the basket is much harder to stop because of his speed than Curry is. Curry relies on misdirection, whereas Kyrie can make a single move and still get to the hoop because he's faster.

If you look at all the critics about Curry coming out of college, every single one of them wondered how he would hold up in the NBA based on his body. He's worked to get where he is.

Kyrie, at least to my naked eye, is at least a full level above Curry in terms of his athleticism. Kyrie is amazingly quick and agile. Curry is more crafty. Nash wasn't the fastest guy, but he knew angles and how to play of them. Kyrie is one of the most amazing people I've ever seen with the ball in his hands.

 

[WiggyRuss]

its honestly one of the reasons i was so impressed with Kyrie when he came in the league...

this 19 year old kid - who DEFINITELY was not a high flyer- who looked nothing like a Rose or Wall or Westbrook or a Bledsoe or Wiggins or whatever.....KYrie looked like a freaking 19 year old kid that could sit next to you in Global Politics.

He won the rookie of the year with an insane rookie stat line because of freaking skilled he was right off the jump. Its just not something you see that often. When you see a guy like a Wall or Rose just jumping over people with their pogo stick legs at 19 years old- you are like- all right- i get it....using their superior athleticism...

you look at Kyrie- and its this 19-20 year old kid just hitting impossible layups off the glass and angles you didnt think were even possible.

 

[CitySushi]

its honestly one of the reasons i was so impressed with Kyrie when he came in the league...

this 19 year old kid - who DEFINITELY was not a high flyer- who looked nothing like a Rose or Wall or Westbrook or a Bledsoe or Wiggins or whatever.....KYrie looked like a freaking 19 year old kid that could sit next to you in Global Politics.

He won the rookie of the year with an insane rookie stat line because of freaking skilled he was right off the jump. Its just not something you see that often. When you see a guy like a Wall or Rose just jumping over people with their pogo stick legs at 19 years old- you are like- all right- i get it....using their superior athleticism...

you look at Kyrie- and its this 19-20 year old kid just hitting impossible layups off the glass and angles you didnt think were even possible.

I'm definitely a huge fan of Kyrie. I'm not knocking the guy in terms of his ability or his upside. I think what he's done is great. But the entirety of this absurd thread is because of one individual trolling to a ridiculous degree. Most of my responses are directed at his comical claims and cherry picked facts.

You're as big of a Kyrie fan on here and even you have the acumen to not give a top 3 PG list of 1) Kyrie, 2) CP3 and 3) RW.

I've got no gripe or really any arguments against what you've said about Kyrie in the past.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I think there is a definitely reason that Kyrie was a highly touted recruit and Curry was not. Kyrie is an explosive athlete, just not when you compare him to prime Rose, Westbrook or Wall. Those guys are almost non-human. But Kyrie going to the basket is much harder to stop because of his speed than Curry is. Curry relies on misdirection, whereas Kyrie can make a single move and still get to the hoop because he's faster.

If you look at all the critics about Curry coming out of college, every single one of them wondered how he would hold up in the NBA based on his body. He's worked to get where he is.

Kyrie, at least to my naked eye, is at least a full level above Curry in terms of his athleticism. Kyrie is amazingly quick and agile. Curry is more crafty. Nash wasn't the fastest guy, but he knew angles and how to play of them. Kyrie is one of the most amazing people I've ever seen with the ball in his hands.

id agree with a lot of this to a certain degree.

The most impressive thing about Curry is that he has the fastest release out of anyone who has ever lived. Its insane. It doesn't even really make sense. I watch it and wonder how the hell he is aiming it.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

I think most people will agree with

1. Curry
2. Westbrook
3. CP3
with Irving and Lillard fighting for 4 and 5

 

[Black Adam]

Let's see if anyone on these boards agrees with you.

Err...no...

 

[WiggyRuss]

I'm definitely a huge fan of Kyrie. I'm not knocking the guy in terms of his ability or his upside. I think what he's done is great. But the entirety of this absurd thread is because of one individual trolling to a ridiculous degree. Most of my responses are directed at his comical claims and cherry picked facts.

You're as big of a Kyrie fan on here and even you have the acumen to not give a top 3 PG list of 1) Kyrie, 2) CP3 and 3) RW.

I've got no gripe or really any arguments against what you've said about Kyrie in the past.

you saw my top 25 list. I mean- 2 MVP's in a row is 2 MVP's in a row.

the number of guys in NBA history to have 2 MVP's is extremely extremely limited. GREAT players - MANY of them do not have even 1.

 

[Black Adam]

OK. So you're a complete idiot.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Or a comedian.

No, just an idiot. Sadly he's completely serious.

 

[Black Adam]

Or a comedian.

eh, he ain't all that funny. I'll go with the former...

 

[WiggyRuss]

eh, he ain't all that funny. I'll go with the former...

who do you think will be the worst team in the West?--- the Lakers, Nuggets, Suns or Kings?

 

[tlance]

So your argument is based on the fact that Kyrie is more naturally talented than Curry right? Kyrie was a phenom recruited to the biggest basketball program in nation. Curry went to some low level D1 school and happened to take that bunch of nobodies to the Elite 8. A guy that was never supposed to even play college ball because NO ONE recruited him.

If you look at things in the grand scheme, Curry shouldn't even be in the NBA. Yet here is an NBA champion and 2 time MVP, because he's worked to get there. That's 1,000x more impressive than someone expected to be there.

So keep comparing the age ranges. That's all well and good. But if you want to keep harping on the age range, keep in mind that Curry wasn't even supposed to be in the NBA.

I met Steph Curry when he was 17, before his senior year in high school. He came to a basketball workout in VA while visiting relatives from his dad's hometown. There were about 20 players in the gym that day, including Steph and his brother. Steph wasn't even the best player on the court. In fact, the only reason he stood out was because we all knew who his father was. Steph was nothing special in high school. There was a reason few D1 schools were recruiting him.

He was a late bloomer and he worked his tail off to develop his phenomenal skill set.

 

[Black Adam]

I think most people will agree with

1. Curry
2. Westbrook
3. CP3
with Irving and Lillard fighting for 4 and 5

now THIS i'd agree with even though i'd say one could argue that CP3 and Westbrook could be interchangeable in their ranking. imo CP3 had better court vision and "basketball I.Q. curse now he's definitely peaked, maybe even a shade PAST peaking so...

 

[Black Adam]

who do you think will be the worst team in the West?--- the Lakers, Nuggets, Suns or Kings?

Hmm, good question actually. I think it'll be a fight between the Nugs and the Lakers as bottom dwellers...

but then i think everyone already knew that...